- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

Woosh\Walker Wireless Prefix List Update
by Beatty Lane-Davis 17 Jun '04

17 Jun '04

Hi Everyone, Woosh Wireless has obtained some more addresses from the generous folks at APNIC that we'll be announcing to all our valued peers at APE, the magic number we'll be advertising is: 202.74.192.0/19 Cheers, b blanedavis(a)woosh.com +64.21.544.716

1 0

SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by Rawiri Blundell 17 Jun '04

17 Jun '04

I brought this to the attention of the applicable people, apparently you caught us at a bad time - we're in a transitional stage. Run a dig now, it should all resolve to TClear I'm told Hope I dont stuff this up.. my very first mailman post ever. Rawiri Blundell ComputerLand Technical Support Analyst http://wellington.nzwireless.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- Tony Wicks Tue Jun 15 15:01:02 NZST 2004 Here is an example for a company that **should** know better - [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]# dig computerland.co.nz mx ; <<>> DiG 9.2.1 <<>> computerland.co.nz mx ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 15150 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;computerland.co.nz. IN MX ;; ANSWER SECTION: computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN MX 5 smtp.computerland.co.nz. computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN MX 10 mta.xtra.co.nz. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN NS alien.xtra.co.nz. computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN NS terminator.xtra.co.nz. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: smtp.computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN A 203.167.229.7 ;; Query time: 297 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 15 15:00:23 2004 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 143 [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]# dig -x 203.167.229.7 ; <<>> DiG 9.2.1 <<>> -x 203.167.229.7 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 61325 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;7.229.167.203.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: 229.167.203.in-addr.arpa. 1800 IN SOA dns1.clear.net.nz. hostmaster.clear.net.nz. 2004051709 10800 3600 604800 1800 ;; Query time: 30 msec ;; SERVER: 203.98.6.51#53(203.98.6.51) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 15 15:00:38 2004 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 108 [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]#

1 0

Fwd: Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook Reviewer Request
by Joe Abley 16 Jun '04

16 Jun '04

Begin forwarded message: > From: "William B. Norton" <wbn(a)equinix.com> > Date: 16 June 2004 12:49:01 EDT > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Cc: wbn(a)equinix.com > Subject: Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook Reviewer Request > > > Hi all - > > If you have no interest in Internet Peering in Asia, read no further. > Otherwise,... > > Over the last year I have been working with the Peering Coordinator > Community, particularly those that have built into and throughout > Asia, to document what is *different* about peering in Asia as > compared to say the U.S. and Europe. In February of this year I > pulled together a group of Peering Coordinators for the APRICOT > Peering Track. I asked them to share Peering processes that they found > different, interesting, counter intuitive, or unexpected. This white > paper documents the lessons learned and insights gained from Peering > Coordinators experienced with peering in Asia. > > The Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook follows the path set by "The > Evolution of the US Peering Ecosystem" white paper that I presented at > the last NANOG, but focuses on the common dynamics and experiences > that folks shared with me over the last year and at the APRICOT > Peering Track. First, the paper documents what I call the "Foreign > Tier 1 Peering Dynamic" that casts a Tier 1 ISP in one Peering > Ecosystem as a Tier 2 ISP in another. We focus on the motivations, the > reasons why this occurs as ISPs expand globally. > > Next, Peering Coordinators shared five reasons that they expanded > into/within Asia: > 1) Incumbent Tier 1 ISPs to peer their routes outside their home market > 2) Meet US Tier 1 ISP Peering Prerequisites > 3) Customers want them in Asia > 4) Global Marketing Benefits > 5) Sell transit in a more attractive transit market > > using four methods of interconnection: > 1) Extend into foreign country > 2) reciprically peer in each others coountry > 3) Half-Circuit peering > 4) Buy an ISP with Tier 1 peering in the foreign ecosystem > > The Peering Coordinators shared nine lessons, things they wish they > had known before expanding into Asia: > 1) Tier 1 ISPs will not want to peer in their home market > 2) There are several challenges peering in Asia > 2a) Peering Process is different - peering@ does not uniformly work > 2b) Many language zones > 2c) Many time zones - logisitics issues here > 2d) Oceans add cost, latency - transpacific transport prices estimated > in the paper > 2e) local loops still a major expense > 2f) transit prices highly variable across countries in Asia - transit > street prices quoted > 3) Creative peering deals > 4) Watch for Inadvertent Tromboning > 5) Local Presence is required > 6) Separation of Int'l Transit from Domestic Transit in some markets > 7) Content that transcends the language barrier is not allowed to be > hosted in country > 8) No true regional content in Asia > 9) Content Peering works in Asia > 10) Understand the Internet Peering Ecosystem prior to building in > > On this last point, the paper enumerates several data points including > naming the Tier 1's, the emerging broadband players, the peering > inclinations, etc. for Hong Kong, Tokyo, Sydney and Singapore. Some of > the Yahoo!Broadband activities for example in Japan show that some > places in Asia are leap-frogging the US in terms of next-gen access > bandwidth. How would you like 40Mbps DSL access for $50/mo or FTTH for > $100/mo? > > I'm at the point where I'd like to do a dozen or so final paper > walk-throughs, where I email the white paper and walk interested folks > through the paper to solicit comments and suggestions. I've found > that talking people through the paper is this is the most effective > way for me to make sure the paper (and subsequent presentation) flow > well, and also increases the likelihood of me getting some feedback. > > If you have any interest in the topic and can spare about 30 minutes > for a walkthrough over the next few weeks, send me a note and let's > schedule a time I can talk you through the paper. I'm also planning a > group walk through (a concall basically) towards the end of the month. > > As with all the Peering White Papers, this one will be made freely > available to the community when it is finished. > > Bill > > Here are the other Peering White Papers that are available (google for > "William B. Norton" to find them on the web, or email wbn(a)equinix.com > with the white paper title in the subject line and I'll send you the > latest version of the white paper.) > > 1. Interconnection Strategies for ISPs documents two dominant > methods ISPs use to interconnect their networks. Over 200 ISPs helped > create this white paper to identify when Internet Exchange Points make > sense and the Direct Circuit interconnect method makes sense. > Financial Models included in the paper quantify the tradeoffs between > these two methods. All relevant data points are footnoted as to > source. > 2. Internet Service Providers and Peering answers the questions: > "What is Peering and Transit? What are the motivations for Peering? > What is the ISP Peering Coordinators Process for obtaining peering? > What are criteria for IX selection?" > 3. A Business Case for Peering builds upon the previous white > papers but focuses on the questions important to the Chief Financial > Officer: "When does Peering make sense from a financial standpoint? > When do all the costs of Peering get completely offset by the cost > savings?" > 4. The Art of Peering: The Peering Playbook builds on the > previous white papers by asking the Peering Coordinators to share the > "Tricks of the Trade", methods of getting peering where otherwise they > might not be able to get peering. These 20 tactics range from the > straight forward to the obscure, from the clever to the borderline > unethical. Nonetheless, Peering Coordinators might be interested in > field-proven effective ways of obtaining peering in this highly > controversial white paper. > 5. The Peering Simulation Game finishes up my half day Peering > Tutorial by engaging the audience in the role of the Peering > Coordinator. Each ISP in turn rolls the dice, expands their network, > collects revenue for each square of customer traffic, and pays transit > fees to their upstream ISP. They quickly learn that if they peer with > each other, the costs of traffic exchange are much less, but they need > to negotiate how to cover the costs of the interconnect. ISP Peering > coordinators have commented on how close the peering simulation game > is to reality in terms of the dialog that takes place. > 6. Do ATM-based Internet Exchange Points Make Sense Anymore? > Applies the "Business Case for Peering" financial models to ATM and > Ethernet-based IXes using current market prices for transit, > transport, and IX Peering Costs. > 7. The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem, introduces and > focuses on several fundamental changes in the Peering Ecosystem > spurred by several events following the telecom collapse of 1999/2000. > 8. The Art of Peering: The IX Playbook follows the same tact as > The Peering Playbook; we first introduce the framework theory of how > and why IXes are valuable from an economic perspective. We then > enumerate about a dozen tactics IXes use to get over the "Start Up > Hump", to build a strong critical mass of participants, and finally, > defense tactics to maintain that population. (To be released at a > future date.) >

1 0

CallPlus prefix list update
by Steve Hawken 16 Jun '04

16 Jun '04

Hi, For networks peering with CallPlus AS 9790 please update your prefix list as below: ip prefix-list callplus-networks description callplus networks contact noc(a)callplus.co.nz ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 5 permit 202.0.151.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 10 permit 202.36.244.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 15 permit 202.37.129.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 20 permit 202.49.34.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 25 permit 202.49.62.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 30 permit 202.50.109.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 35 permit 202.50.170.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 40 permit 202.180.64.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 45 permit 203.97.152.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 50 permit 203.100.223.208/20 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 55 permit 203.184.0.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 60 permit 203.215.142.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 65 permit 210.55.111.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 70 permit 210.55.254.0/24 Cheers, Steve Steve Hawken Senior Network Engineer DDI ++ 64 9 919 6038 Mobile ++ 64 21 778 891 Email steveh(a)callplus.co.nz <mailto:steveh(a)callplus.co.nz>

1 0

NZNOG 2005 in Hamilton
by Donald Neal 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Planning is now under way for the next NZ Network Operators' Group conference. This is to be hosted by the WAND group (Thanks again, guys!) at The University of Waikato's main campus in Hamilton in the first week of February 2005. If you have an opinion on the form this should take, please speak up now. If not, you're likely to end up with something bearing a strong resemblance to this year's gathering, with tutorials on Wednesday and a stream of presentations on Thursday and Friday. (That's 2-4 February.) Don't rush to volunteer to present just yet - we should have a proper Call for Presenters out around the end of this month - but now is the time for people who are likely to attend to suggest topics they'd like to know more about, people they'd like to hear from, or changes to the way things have been done in the past. Please post suggestions either to me or to the list as seems appropriate. I'll try to provide a digest of responses by next Friday, 25 June. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | Bubble and squeak Technical Specialist | - Boiled mouse. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Dynamic address space in SORBS causes mail rejection
by Richard Cox 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:14:12 +1200 "Craig Box" <craig(a)itpartners.co.nz> wrote: | While we're on the subject of mail rejections, I look after a couple | of sites on a TelstraClear Tempest connections, both with IP addresses | on 203.97.48.0/21. Unfortunately, spam DNS blacklist SORBS list them | as being on Dynamic IP space: | | 203.97.48.x found in Dynamic IP Space (Cable, DSL & Dial Ups) | Address or Block: 203.97.48.0 / 21 | Information: Dynamic IP address, use your ISPs mail server | | ..and as such a number of sites (a number growing by about one a day, | just the ones I get told about) are blocking mail based on the SORBS | listing. The point being that the inbound mail administrators have the right to decide whether to accept connections from hosts in dynamic-IP ranges. | Some months ago I got in touch with TC's faults desk and they | claim to have emailled off to SORBS to have this reclassified. | | Nothing changed, so I got in touch with our local tech contact at TC; | he said he'd fire it off to the ISP guys but I've not heard back from | him either. All true. On Jan 30 The Telstra Abuse Desk wrote to SORBS about the block being labelled as "dynamic" and asked for "a copy of the headers of the spam". SORBS replied, explaining that the DUHL list identified their IP's DHCP status, not that any spam had been sent. Telstra Abuse Desk didn't respond to that reply. On March 11 Mark Seward wrote in again from Telstra, asking for the block status to be changed: SORBS replied, explaining that for security reasons such a request would need to come from the designated APNIC PoC for the IP block (which currently would be netobjs(a)clear.net.nz) However that reply got an auto-response saying that Mark Seward was no longer with Telstra, and mail should now go to Peter Ambrose and/or Sid Jones, so SORBS dutifully forwarded the previous correspondence to those two people, hoping they'd get the appropriate person to write in to authorise the change. But nothing further was heard until April 7 when Jason, as "isp.duty(a)team.telstraclear.co.nz" wrote in asking how to get the block's status changed, and he was sent a similar answer to that which had gone to Mark Seward, Peter Ambrose, and Sid Jones: but still nothing was heard from the designated PoC. | I've asked around about this and the best suggestions are "you're an | ISP customer, you should be smarthosting through an ISP mail server." | Problems with this include the fact that we no longer have any control | over retry/routing/any of the niceties of controlling your own outbound | SMTP; the fact that clear.net.nz mailservers are currently being eaten | by Zafi and mail delivery will probably slow down; and the fact that | we "just plain shouldn't have to." If you're on static IP, then as you say, you shouldn't have to. TelstraClear should have been able to follow the simple instructions to get this changed, normally a very straightforward process! | I'm not sure where to go from here. It's possible that if I ask TC | to set the PTR for each affected customer to smtp.$CLIENT and then | manually request that it's removed from SORBS, it may be done. If an IP is to send mail, that is a good suggestion in its own right. DNS should also have a sensible TTL - at least 12 hours is reasonable. -- Richard Cox

1 0

Akamai outage
by Juha Saarinen 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/06/15/HNakamaioutage_1.html Not sure if NZ is affected too, but have noticed that Windows Update is unusually slow. -- Juha

2 1

Dynamic address space in SORBS causes mail rejection
by Craig Box 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Hi everyone. While we're on the subject of mail rejections, I look after a couple of sites on a TelstraClear Tempest connections, both with IP addresses on 203.97.48.0/21. Unfortunately, spam DNS blacklist SORBS (http://www.dnsbl.au.sorbs.net/) list them as being on Dynamic IP space: 203.97.48.x found in Dynamic IP Space (Cable, DSL & Dial Ups) Address or Block: 203.97.48.0 / 21 Information: Dynamic IP address, use your ISPs mail server ...and as such a number of sites (a number growing by about one a day, just the ones I get told about) are blocking mail based on the SORBS listing. Some months ago I got in touch with TC's faults desk and they claim to have emailled off to SORBS to have this reclassified. Nothing changed, so I got in touch with our local tech contact at TC; he said he'd fire it off to the ISP guys but I've not heard back from him either. I've asked around about this and the best suggestions are "you're an ISP customer, you should be smarthosting through an ISP mail server." Problems with this include the fact that we no longer have any control over retry/routing/any of the niceties of controlling your own outbound SMTP; the fact that clear.net.nz mailservers are currently being eaten by Zafi and mail delivery will probably slow down; and the fact that we "just plain shouldn't have to." We have a hosted mail server of our own that we could use as a smarthost, however it will be a significant increase in load on this machine where we have a perfectly good mail server sitting at the clients site. I agree completely about customers not running mail service on dial-up lines, but a Tempest connection with a static IP address is a business service, not a 56k modem with an infected Windows box behind it. I'm not sure where to go from here. It's possible that if I ask TC to set the PTR for each affected customer to smtp.$CLIENT and then manually request that it's removed from SORBS, it may be done. Their FAQ (http://www.dnsbl.au.sorbs.net/DUL-FAQ.html) suggests I'm more likely to be asked to have my ISP ask. I'd like to see TC deal to this, perhaps by putting more information in the WHOIS db about what space is static and what is dynamic, and possibly changing PTR records appropriately. According to the DNSBL faq, the contact listed in the RIR can have it changed - it would be really nice if this problem could go away. If there are any other suggestions that anyone has about how to deal with this problem, please let me know. Regards, Craig Box Phone 07 957 2653 IT Partners Ltd Fax 07 957 2659 PO Box 9361 Mobile 021 475 869 Hamilton, New Zealand _________________________________________________________________ #include <standard-disclaimer.h> _________________________________________________________________

1 0

Map/schematic over NZ Internet connectivity?
by Juha Saarinen 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Has the NZ Internet connectivity been mapped out yet? Maybe I'm not googling right, but I can't find any resource which lists national and international connectivity for New Zealand. -- Juha

6 9

RE: [nznog] TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing
by Donald Neal 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Abley wrote: > > > On 15 Jun 2004, at 08:22, Drew Broadley wrote: > > > > > The end is nigh. > > > > The doomsaying is all very dramatic, but where's the reasoning? > > > > If it suddenly costs money to talk to networks which are > customers of > > TCL, it surely makes *more* sense to peer with them > directly, not less. Indeed. Peering by US content providers is one of the big changes identified in http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0405/pdf/norton.pdf . Perhaps sadly, one of the possible futures for the US identified by the author in answer to questions about his presentation at the most recent NANOG was the New Zealand model, in which charges aren't made for national traffic. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | Bubble and squeak Technical Specialist | - Boiled mouse. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0